THE PRESIDENTIAL election and the tumult surrounding it has become just about the easiest thing in the world to complain about, to point out flaws and gripe about the candidates and their relative stances on the whole gamut of issues. In this I am as guilty as the next man, and probably more than most. But in looking at our presidential election, marred as it may be by negative campaigning and excessive media coverage, we ought to acknowledge and appreciate the miracle that occurs every four years in this country and the basic electoral assumptions we make every time we cast a vote.
First, Americans basically assume that no matter who wins, the election results will not result in widespread violence. To us this may seem like the essence of a civilized democracy, but in much, if not most, of the world, peaceful transitions in government are not the norm. Take, for example, the situation in Pakistan, where President Musharraf seized power in a coup in 1999. His continued hold on power has been fraught with violence, particularly the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, a prominent opposition candidate. This in turn has sparked more violence and delayed the promised elections that many hoped would help democratize the country. In the United States we simply take for granted that the results of the elections will be accepted peacefully and the two parties will soldier on, looking forward to the next contest.
Secondly, Americans assume that elections will be fair. Again, in many countries this is not the case. Kenya provides an example of a country in which the recent elections have been marred by fraud and by violence. The popular opposition Orange Democratic Movement claims that supporters of President Kibaki rigged the presidential race. Many reports indicate suspicious circumstances at the very least, and protests have been met by violence that has left at least 600 dead.
Even in hotly contested elections, Americans have a tendency to believe in the basic honesty of the system, with only a few exceptions; the elections of 1876, 1960, and 2000 spring to mind. But even in those cases, violence did not break out, and the system righted itself. Thus, these somewhat tarnished elections remain isolated incidents both in truth and in the popular memory, and Americans retain a basic trust in the electoral system.
Third, we control our own elections with little to no foreign influence on the outcome. Again, this is not the case the world over. For example, several years ago Ukraine elected a candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, over an opponent backed by both the sitting government and neighboring superpower, Russia. This election was marred by foul play, violations of elections rules, and most notably an attempt to poison Yushchenko that left his face scarred and blistered. We just assume that our elections will not be influenced by foul play from another country. This freedom from fear is another blessing we often overlook.
Finally, Americans assume that the person elected president will abide by the rules established for the office, and will not seek to continue his or her term or influence beyond the allotted time. We believe, even know, that when our next president's time in office is over, whether that be in four years or eight, that he or she will step down and not seek to continue to wield power. Not only that, but it is assumed that a former president will not seek to place in office a direct successor. He or she might endorse someone, but no more.
This stands in contrast to, for example, the role of Vladimir Putin in Russia. For a while, many speculated that Putin would seek to remain in office beyond his allotted term. While he has said he will step down, he has nominated a loyalist as his successor, and has hinted that he would like to stay in the government, possibly as a prime minister. This suggests that he will continue to wield the power in Russia. The Russian leader's record stands as an example of what we don't want, and don't expect from our president.
So, for all the aggravation and quibbling that comes along with our presidential election, we ought to be thankful it is not worse and that it is conducted in a relatively civilized manner. We can give thanks also for the expectations placed on the president, and the mechanisms in place to prevent any undue concentrations of power. And we can be grateful for the fortune we have to live and act under such a successful system.
Robby Colby's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at rcolby@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
